I hope he is not playing next week. Had a mare in both defence and attack today. This is not just his first week he has being bad either before anyone says anything.

still not cutting it for me, yes he's an attacking threat, but he's still all over the place in defence.

I just don't think he's any better than 2 years ago.

always been an advocate of Craig's positive attacking play and that his role in the team is not primarly defense. However tonight and several other occassions this season he has looked poor. Starting to think he is not as good as i hoped he would be.

When put into space with ball in hand he is a great sight to see but his defence and constant intercept attempts really leaves us exposed!!!

he was rubbish tonight,

but



Tansey made him look like the worlds greatest player

And here is the weekly bash Hall thread.....personally thought he was good defensively tonight....put in a couple of hefry hits in 2nd half but handling was poor unusually.

Not his best game tonight but the only way i can see him improving , Is under a differant coach.

But bounced straight off!

My thoughts exactly. Don't think it was a vintage Craig Hall attacking performance, but didn't think he was as bad as people are making out!

IMO, if we can give him plenty of ball, he will score/create loads of tries for us

Err no he didnt.....agree with Bones...a different coach would improve him....Cullen did.

Or, he just looked better in NL1?

A bit harsh - should have taken that pass from Washy and put his winger away, granted, but not his worst game. Besides, we have no one else to bring in in the backs so a run at centre might be the final acid test.

Not his best performance but don't underestimate the value of his touchline conversion. 8 points gave us the buffer we need in the 2nd half. Had it only been a 6 point lead, Wakey could have levelled it at the end.

Not bashing Hall, but he hasn't really improved in nearly 4 years. Maybe needs a good run at left centre, but we all know that's not going to happen.

Quite right.